[p2p-research] Capital Club

[Stan Rhodes]

Vinay,

NatCap is very naive, to the point where it's simply wrong, in my opinion.
The solutions aren't really solutions, they're just improvements on top of a
rotten model.  That doesn't mean the solutions wouldn't be good, but it does
mean they wouldn't solve the root problem.  I do want to add that some of
the solutions ARE pretty silly: the stuff on the hypercars alone, for
instance, is really quite ridiculous.  But, they're dreamers.  Rather than
digging into the systemic problem, NapCap tries to convince that the
solution is already in the wing, but it's simply not believable.  I asked
others who read it what they thought too, including some economists, energy
buffs, and generally smart people.  Their impressions were similar: it just
doesn't hold up.

Btw, I think Paul Hawken is guilty of similar wishful thinking in Blessed
Unrest, as if the presence of all these organizations and people means there
is A global movement rather than just... global movement.  Can't blame him
for wanting it to be, I think we all want it to be.

Muhammad Yunus, in his newest book, strikes straight to the heart of the
socioeconomic matter: the problem of profit-driven business.  This is the
same problem Chris Cook, Patrick, and myself all identified in our analysis
as well.  His solution is also aligned: the "social business," aka my
businesstrust, aka Chris Cook's open corporate partnership.  Yunus' take on
why profit-driven businesses aren't feasible for real public good is concise
and accurate.  If you get a chance, please check it out, but if not, his
thoughts will be included with my "synthesis" of the models.  I put that in
quotes because, in reality, they're describing the same systems with little
variance.  This is why in my first conversation with Cook he told me
casually 'it's an emergent phenomenon.'

The for-profit business model selects for rent-seeking, collusion, and
monopoly.  Everything that's happened in the US and world makes perfect
sense if you look at the selective pressures.  Hindsight's 20/20 and all
that.

Sorry, I only have a hardcopy of Yunus' book, otherwise I'd send you a pdf
or copy the text.

-- Stan



On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Vinay Gupta <hexayurt at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> What do y'all think of Natural Capitalism from Lovins et. al.?
> Vinay
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Vinay Gupta - Designer, Hexayurt Project - an excellent public domain
> refugee shelter system
> Gizmo Project VOIP: 775-743-1851 (usually works!)                Skype/Gizmo/Gtalk:
> hexayurt
> Cell: Iceland (+354) 869-4605
> http://hexayurt.com
> "Poverty is the worst form of violence" said Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.
>    But what to do?
>
>
>
> On Mar 6, 2008, at 7:48 PM, Marcin Jakubowski wrote:
>
> Patrick,
>
> Before we get further into this important topic, I'd like you to define
> your problem statement more clearly. You are presenting certain content,
> with a stated goal of explaining centralization of power. Is your goal that
> in itself, or is your further goal to address this ill and propose a
> solution? If so, then I would like you to phrase your content in the form of
> an explicit, testable hypothesis. This will help clarify and motivate your
> set of concepts, and provide a springboard for practical critique, relevant
> to the underpinnings of society. If what you are proposing cannot be tested,
> then for the purpose of my work, it would have limited use. Please expand on
> your motives and scope.
>
> Marcin
>
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:44 AM, Patrick Anderson <agnucius at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello fellow researchers,
> >
> > This post is a first step toward describing the very basics of
> > economic activity - including such topics as ownership, production,
> > profit, policy, governance, growth.
> >
> > This material should be understandable by any audience, but
> > concentrates on issues that are not so commonly discussed, so should
> > be interesting to even the most hardened economist.
> >
> > I hope you will help me shape this into a full description of how we
> > have arrived at the dangerous centralization of power we now face at
> > the global level.
> >
> > Please give critical feedback with logical arguments.
> >
> > This first part shows that individual consumer ownership is the most
> > efficient arrangement when utilization/price is large enough, and that
> > individual consumers already choose that path.
> >
> > Part One: The Utilization-to-Price Ratio
> >
> > Why do most people choose to buy an automobile instead of renting?
> >
> > Why do most people choose to rent a rug-doctor instead of buying?
> >
> > When a person can make use of (utilize) a machine to a sufficient
> > degree, it is more efficient for them to OWN instead of RENT.
> >
> > But wait, how could that be?  The owner (whoever he is) must pay all
> > costs either way.  A rental agency must pay for the initial
> > investment, upkeep/repair/maintenance/wear, insurance,
> > protection/security, storage, taxes, and any wages to workers needed
> > to do any of those thing.  A private owner must pay those exact same
> > costs, so how could it possibly be cheaper to own outright instead of
> > rent?
> >
> > The difference is called 'profit'.  Profit is the difference between
> > the costs an owner pays and the price a consumer is willing to pay.
> > When the owner and consumer are the same person, there is no such
> > thing as profit.  That is the savings in ownership over rental.
> >
> > But what about machines that are not "worth it" to own because that
> > individual cannot sufficiently utilize them?  It must be worth it for
> > SOMEONE to own them, otherwise the rental agency wouldn't do so.  The
> > difference here is a matter of utilization.
> >
> > How can a consumer increase utilization to the point of making
> > ownership "worth it"?  One way is to buy the machine with a group of
> > other consumers.  Organizing with your neighbors to buy a rug-doctor
> > is cheaper if there are enough of you to keep that equipment busy, so
> > why don't we (consumers) do this more often?  Why do we leave that
> > work of organizing up to a business that intends to charge us price
> > above cost?
> >
> > There is real work involved in the act of organization, but that cost
> > (wages to management) must be paid either way.  So what is keeping us
> > (the consumers) from organizing and cooperatively owning machines,
> > buildings, even land?
> >
> > I think part of the problem is a long-standing belief that whoever
> > possesses the skills to operate those machines should be the owners,
> > but doesn't the above argument show that the consumers must be the
> > owners for optimum efficiency?
> >
> > I think another part of the problem is in figuring out how those
> > resources should be shared among the owners.  It is a difficult,
> > sticky situation that most people would rather just avoid altogether
> > because of the in-fighting they perceive would occur.  It seems such a
> > group could write some 'rules' about how to schedule access and how
> > much each individual must compensate the others for any extra wear or
> > exclusion they cause.  I see such a contract, if 'properly' written,
> > would be the only thing our society needs to begin down the road of
> > peace and abundance, but will delay that discussion for now.
> >
> > Cooperative consumer ownership is quite rare today, but there are a
> > few cases where a group of friends wanting a private airplane make a
> > "shared investment", and then rent the plane from the collective
> > others whenever they want to use it.  None of those people need the
> > ability to fly themselves, they can just hire a pilot and pay that
> > wage as a cost while still saving money by not paying profit.
> >
> > Another example is shared ownership of a vacation house.  The
> > for-profit "Time Share" industry has grown around that desire, but I'm
> > referring to the less common case when a private group of people buy a
> > house that they share amongst themselves in whatever way they see fit.
> >
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20080306/0759243b/attachment-0001.html